— EPA chief Lisa Jackson, alias “Richard Windsor,” resigned in late December amidst a transparency scandal involving the use of fake email accounts to avoid scrutiny. Today, the same organization that sued for access to those emails reveals that the EPA gave green groups fee waivers for FOIA requests 93 percent of the time, whereas the Competitive Enterprise Institute was required to pay 14 out of 15 times.

— The IRS’s targeting of Tea Party groups (and small-government ones and ones whose stated mission is to “make America a better place to live”) went back to 2010, when they first started receiving egregiously detailed questionnaires. The White House has known since April, and pinned it on the Cincinnati field office originally, per the IRS commissioner’s apology. Not only is that claim not true—senior IRS officials have known since 2011, as the Washington Post reported last night, and they lied to Congress about it—but the Cincinnati office isn’t just a random peripheral subdivision, it’s the main office for processing exempt organizations claims. Not to mention CNN is now reporting that several other field offices were involved. Both the President and House Speaker John Boehner have promised to look into the matter. On the Senate side, Max Baucus will be heading up the investigation, and he actually encouraged investigating Tea Party groups.

— In the most shocking scandal yet in the president’s war on leaks—alternatively, war on whistleblowers—the Associated Press revealed yesterday that the Justice Department obtained two months’ worth of phone records from more than 20 different phone lines in an apparent attempt to trace the sources of a story about a foiled bomb plot by Yemen-based terrorists. The AP’s CEO has called it a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.”

Not every one of these could have been uncovered by the mainstream press, though all of them have to do with concerns raised by conservatives months or in some cases years ago that weren’t taken seriously. ProPublica’s decision yesterday evening to out the Cincinnati office as their source for confidential tax documents seems especially self-serving in light of the developing scandal. The Washington Post‘s story on Lisa Jackson’s resignation didn’t even mention her pseudonymous emails. You’d think a major newspaper would be concerned enough about transparency to do so. With a mainstream press this solicitous of the administration, is it any wonder they thought they could get away with snooping on reporters’ phone records? American Pravda, indeed.

Update: I guess I should have put that headline in quotes. Also, RNC chairmanReince Priebus has just called for Attorney General Eric Holder’s resignation.

Tea Party Patriots:
“We are insisting that Congress launch an investigation into this matter to determine exactly what happened. Who made the decisions to target specific groups? When were these guidelines implemented? What other groups have been inappropriately targeted? Who in our government knew about it? How will those responsible be held accountable?”

When several dozen “social welfare” organizations pop-up immediately after the Supreme Court ruled no limits on money in politics, are you suggesting that it was not prudent for the IRS to even look into the matter? To make sure they are in fact “social welfare” orientated? To date, I don’t think any of them have even held a food drive. Somewhere, a bunch of Muslim charities are wondering why no one has paid attention to their complains for 12 years.

In DC, the greater the outrage, the more inconsequential the matter. Exhibit A – WMD intelligence. Number of people held accountable – zero. Number of dead American troops – 4,500+

So the Tea Party is now against profiling? That is good to know. I will let my flag flying tea party neighbor know that he now needs to be against the profiling of certain ethnic and religious groups as well, because as you know we cannot trust the government in these matters.

Deafening silence from conservatives when the IRS was targeting opponents of Bush in 2004 and other left/liberal groups during his reign. Really, your record defending liberty is lousy. You only consider it in danger when your ox is getting the horn.

Democrat SenatorClaire McCaskill of Missouri,
“Anyone who was in a position of responsibility that knew this very un-American activity was going on should be fired.”

Democrat Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois,
“It is absolutely unacceptable to single out any political group, right, left or center. It goes back to some of the worst days of the Richard Nixon administration.”

@Bob Jones,
So you are for making generalizations based on your neighbor? That is good to know. I will let my fellow Tea Party Patriots know that Bob is now for making generalizations based on his neighbor.

As soon as you can name some similar left-wing tax-exempt “social welfare” groups that are equally political, and that have not been investigated, then and only then will I start to think that there might be something here. And by that I mean provide specifics, not just the usual rant about “Everyone knows the libs do it too! I read it in an e-mail!”

Of course, if Priebus is calling for Holder’s resignation, well, that proves that it must all be true. He’d never do that for partisan political reasons, would he?

Michael Powe
Yes because almost all the media at the time was was pro Bush…
Or perhaps this lame deflection is based on nothing but your wishful thinking, I mean seriously, do you honestly believe that all the left wing media outlets would not have been all over this if there really was something to it ???

Obama’s entire policy on Libya should be in serious question. Why did we decide to help topple Quaddafi? What was the national interest? Then,why did we still have an embassy in such a dangerous area,after most countries had left? Finally,where was the president and the secretary of state during the time the attacks occurred?

I can’t believe how many TAC readers are against conservatives. Do you think the Sandra Fluke story, that was covered ad nauseum by the mainstream media, was a legitimate story? It was a joke. A 30-year-old woman who can’t afford birth control yet can scrape together the money to attend one of the most expensive law schools in the country (well, perhaps she received a full scholarship) and stands to earn an incredibly high salary upon graduation? Give me a break. Further, I recall reading that very few people are actually unable to afford contraception, so it was really not a pressing issue for people in our country.

” – In the most shocking scandal yet in the president’s war on leaks—alternatively, war on whistleblowers—the Associated Press revealed yesterday that the Justice Department obtained two months’ worth of phone records from more than 20 different phone lines in an apparent attempt to trace the sources of a story about a foiled bomb plot by Yemen-based terrorists.”

The so called war on whistleblowers is missing many facts or details that are still being revealed/investigated. The whistleblower(s) broke the law by releasing classified information. Do you want anyone to be able to release any information to the press regardless of the cost? If so, ask the Republicans to change the law.

Once again the Republicans are outraged by the Obama administration doing what the Republicans were outraged about a year ago. A year ago they were accusing Obama of purposely leaking classified information because the leaked information was positive for Obama’s actions. Even the liberal media are not reporting the details/history about AP’s involvement in a serious leak of information.

Whistleblower related to AP:

The AP story in May 2012 disclosed a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al-Qaida plot to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States. The same Republicans that are outraged about the AP phone records were accusing the Obama administration of purposely leaking the AP story. Republicans were demanding appointment of special counsels to investigate those leaks because they believed the leaks were motivated by partisan politics and that the Obama administration was putting its own image ahead of protecting national security. They also believed that the Obama Justice Department was incapable of aggressively investigating the case.

Did you read the above link to Mother Jones dated Jun. 12, 2012:

“Senate Democrats blasted the cyberattack-on-Iran leaks and warned that the disclosure of Obama’s order could put the country at risk of a retaliatory strike. Republican Old Man and former presidential candidate Senator John McCain charged Obama with violating national security,z saying the leaks are “an attempt to further the president’s political ambitions for the sake of his re-election at the expense of our national security.”

He called for an investigation. The FBI, no doubt thrilled to be caught in the middle of all this, dutifully opened a leak investigation, and senators on both sides of the aisle are planning an inquiry of their own.”

Holder stated today that he was recused from the AP phone records case. The reason – Holder is under investigation by the FBI for being a potential leaker of the very successful CIA operation in Yemen. Remember McCain’s above statement.

In testimony in February 2013, CIA Director John Brennan noted that the FBI had questioned him about whether he was AP’s source, which he denied. He called the release of the information to the media about the terror plot an “unauthorized and dangerous disclosure of classified information.”

As both major political parties, in America, are really just different wings of the same bird of prey,is it any surprise that they would both utilize the organs of government,once in power,to go after people and groups who they look upon as rivals or threats to their agendas. This is nothing new in American history. Beginning with the Alien and Sedition Acts during the formative years of the Republic through Lincoln,Wilson,FDR,LBJ,Nixon up to and including the present occupant of the White House,to a greater or lesser degree,it is par for the course to do anything to cling to power by destroying your perceived opposition. FDR, above all, was a master of the tactics of intimidation. He would use the IRS to bludgeon his enemies. Especially his enemies in the Press. With that said,the question to ask is why do these various groups,such as the Tea Party,need anyone’s permission to exercise a 1st Amendment Right? Could it be that it is the tax Law and its application that needs to be scrutinized and not the different groups under attack? As Tacitus once said,and I paraphrase, “too many laws makes for too much corruption.” The fact is that any Presidential regime that uses the tax laws,or the postal laws,or the environmental laws,or the anti-trust laws,or the RICO statutes, or any other Federal laws as weapons to destroy their opposition is corrupt in the extreme and should be brought to task.

Annek has a point about how the distaste Bush has left in the mouth of some commentators here can lead to a shrugging of the shoulders about the Obama scandals. Contrary to what Ken T. says above, I don’t recall there being any sound finding or indication that Bush used the IRS politically.

I would however note as regards this AP wire-tapping business that everyone knows damn well that if Bush had done it all those Republicans screaming at Obama now would be justifying the living *hell* out of those taps. It *was* in pursuance of a very very bad leak that could have had immediate consequences for American lives—just as Eric Holder said—and if you ask me the only reason we see the media screaming about government intrusiveness now is because it is *they* who are the subject of same. Thus at any rate here it seems to me the Republicans are just being monstrously hypocritical, and as stupid as they are they’ll continue and let that drain credibility from them as regards these other scandals too, the morons.

Same as they’ll push the Benghazhi business until everyone knows they are really just after Hillary.

Geez it’s hard to be even-handed, Annek, when the people benefitting from same are so stupid and venal.

I used to work for a very liberal organization that was audited multiple times during the Bush Administration for obviously political reasons. I wouldn’t be shocked to find out that this par for the course regardless of who’s president. The difference here of course, is that it involves the Tea Party, for whom pouty outrage is both means and end.

Tom B and Sharculese: Just for the record, I’m not the one who brought Bush into it – that was another commenter above me. I was merely pointing out that for all the yelling about how the right wing groups were “targeted”, I have seen no claim or implication that any such group was unfairly denied tax-exempt status, or that any left wing groups were granted such status while being held to a lower standard. Which to me makes the whole thing a tempest in a teapot.

The only “scandal” here that I can see is the implication that the IRS does not automatically investigate EVERY group claiming tax-exempt status, no matter who or what they claim to be. That to me should be the minimum standard for the IRS to be doing their job.

As for what did or did not happen during the Bush administration — I never have found “But they did it first” to be a compelling argument, no matter which side uses it.